Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fixed Odds Betting Terminals vs Internet Betting: Which is

2»

Comments

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Honestly, FOBTers would be better off backing England's opponents/Laying England when Jade Dernbach is playing for England.

    It's a 100% success rate.

    [rips up Ashley Giles betting slips]

    At least I've got the win. Well done on the 6-first-ball.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Sarah Palin is looking rather prophetic now: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100262116/ukraine-sarah-palin-and-mitt-romney-were-right-about-russia/

    More by accident than design, I suspect!

    All that folksiness may horrify the East coast set, but does play well in the flyover states.
    GeoffM said:

    HYUFD said:
    CPAC? The political speech of the weekend (albeit against no opposition) had to be Sarah Palin's tour de force on Saturday at CPAC. Barnstorming stuff. I might watch it again tonight.
    I hope she runs and wins in 2016.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    GeoffM Good speech or not, Hillary would crush her if she run, but CPAC is dominated by college libertarians, thus explaining Paul's victory
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    HYUFD said:

    GeoffM Good speech or not, Hillary would crush her if she run, but CPAC is dominated by college libertarians, thus explaining Paul's victory

    True on all counts I suspect. I do enjoy CPAC though - it gives me hope that all is not lost.

    @foxinsoxuk Yes, I rather liked the mock self-deprecating line of "who could have seen this coming?"

  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited March 2014
    antifrank said:

    The families of many FOBT gamblers would disagree that they cause no harm to others. Anyway, society has long been happy to step in to stop people doing harm to themselves. These machines are pernicious and would not be available illegally if they were banned. Only headbanging libertarians would shed a tear at this restriction on bookies' rights to fleece poor punters.

    No doubt many of the families of alcoholics would argue that alcohol causes harm to more than the individual who drinks it. That is no reason for banning it. The fact that "society" has in the past unjustifiably intervened to stop adults harming themselves is no reason for it to continue to do so today. These unprincipled arguments, which Christie Davies termed "causalism", are a road to perdition. In fact, under different social conditions, they could be used to support restrictions on homosexuality or heresy. No doubt only "headbanging libertarians" would shed a tear if "society" stepped in to stop such practices.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,409
    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    FOBTs do a lot of harm. Can anyone identify any substantial good that they do? If not, they should be banned.

    Legalising gambling is justifiable because it allows the state to control a dangerous activity that would otherwise take place in a wholly unregulated way (it could never be effectively stopped). The state should use that power to control here.

    An authoritarian's argument par excellence. Fixed odds betting terminals should be legal because they do no damage other than to the people who use them and intend to use them. Whether something should be banned depends not on whether it causes harm or good to "society" (whatever that may be), but whether it causes demonstrable harm to individuals without their consent.
    The families of many FOBT gamblers would disagree that they cause no harm to others. Anyway, society has long been happy to step in to stop people doing harm to themselves. These machines are pernicious and would not be available illegally if they were banned. Only headbanging libertarians would shed a tear at this restriction on bookies' rights to fleece poor punters.
    If Bookies are allowed FOBTs in their shops they should be OBLIGED to take bets (To a reasonable size say £1000) from ANY punter !
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,889
    GeoffM Indeed, and Dan Hannan was again giving his now traditional Tea Party rousing speech from the token rightwinger from across the pond
    http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/03/british-mep-daniel-hannan-speaks-at-cpac2014/
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Pulpstar said:

    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    FOBTs do a lot of harm. Can anyone identify any substantial good that they do? If not, they should be banned.

    Legalising gambling is justifiable because it allows the state to control a dangerous activity that would otherwise take place in a wholly unregulated way (it could never be effectively stopped). The state should use that power to control here.

    An authoritarian's argument par excellence. Fixed odds betting terminals should be legal because they do no damage other than to the people who use them and intend to use them. Whether something should be banned depends not on whether it causes harm or good to "society" (whatever that may be), but whether it causes demonstrable harm to individuals without their consent.
    The families of many FOBT gamblers would disagree that they cause no harm to others. Anyway, society has long been happy to step in to stop people doing harm to themselves. These machines are pernicious and would not be available illegally if they were banned. Only headbanging libertarians would shed a tear at this restriction on bookies' rights to fleece poor punters.
    If Bookies are allowed FOBTs in their shops they should be OBLIGED to take bets (To a reasonable size say £1000) from ANY punter !
    It's not substantially good for you. Society is doing you a favour. Or something. Rejoice.

  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,989
    Pulpstar said:


    If Bookies are allowed FOBTs in their shops they should be OBLIGED to take bets (To a reasonable size say £1000) from ANY punter !

    Well, that might have worked in the days of the independent shop manager but they all have targets, quotas and can't blow their nose without checking with Head Office.

    A betting office is ok for a fiver or a tenner for an interest but it's not a place for serious betting and of course if you want to get into the laying side, then you need exchanges and the like which is where, I suspect, the real punters are to be found.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    antifrank said:

    The families of many FOBT gamblers would disagree that they cause no harm to others. Anyway, society has long been happy to step in to stop people doing harm to themselves. These machines are pernicious and would not be available illegally if they were banned. Only headbanging libertarians would shed a tear at this restriction on bookies' rights to fleece poor punters.

    No doubt many of the families of alcoholics would argue that alcohol causes harm to more than the individual who drinks it. That is no reason for banning it. The fact that "society" has in the past unjustifiably intervened to stop adults harming themselves is no reason for it to continue to do so today. These unprincipled arguments, which Christie Davies termed "causalism", are a road to perdition. In fact, under different social conditions, they could be used to support restrictions on homosexuality or heresy. No doubt only "headbanging libertarians" would shed a tear if "society" stepped in to stop such practices.
    Since we do not now identify any harm from homosexuality or heresy, your comparison is inane.

    You seem to overlook that we already place substantial restrictions on the production and sale of alcohol. Quite correctly, and we could step out further in that direction. I'm not suggesting banning gambling; merely eradicating one particularly pernicious form of it.
  • Well comment is free is about to become even more fun.

    Owen Jones has signed for the guardian as their new columnist.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 2m

    Oh, I missed this earlier, but see @OwenJones84 has switched from the Independent to The Guardian

    pic.twitter.com/pvUOg9qW9J
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    Incidentally, I'll be in Moscow for the next 3 days for my day job. Curious to see if most people are agog about Crimea or largely ignoring it.
  • Incidentally, I'll be in Moscow for the next 3 days for my day job. Curious to see if most people are agog about Crimea or largely ignoring it.

    If you've never been before, can I just warn you, using Moscow roads is an experience, even as a passenger.

    Every lane is viewed as an overtaking lane, including the ones going in the opposite direction.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,961
    edited March 2014
    The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Well comment is free is about to become even more fun.

    Owen Jones has signed for the guardian as their new columnist.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 2m

    Oh, I missed this earlier, but see @OwenJones84 has switched from the Independent to The Guardian

    pic.twitter.com/pvUOg9qW9J

    As a result of this I've finally succumbed and got a login to Comment Macht Frei

    Not much thought and effort went into the username - I don't think it will last long enough.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300

    Well comment is free is about to become even more fun.

    Owen Jones has signed for the guardian as their new columnist.

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 2m

    Oh, I missed this earlier, but see @OwenJones84 has switched from the Independent to The Guardian

    pic.twitter.com/pvUOg9qW9J

    not often a rat joins a sinking ship.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    Ok, we'll add "plonkers" to the list. Decisions made by Brown/Darling (Scots btw)?

    worst plonkers ever all the same. You do not seem to get it mind you , it is nothing to do with being English or Scottish . Your insecurity gets the better of you and you always assume it is about not liking the English, try reading wider than the London press. I am interested in improving Scotland , avoiding illegal wars , nuclear weapons, poverty , etc. It is nothing personal against you despite your narrow minded thinking.
    I agree about Brown/Darling being plonkers, though I expect for different reasons. I've never said you, or anyone else, are anti-English; just noticed that your first line of defence seems to be abuse. You have, though, given me a reasoned response, for which I'm grateful.

    I'm ambivalent over Scottish independence. I'd be sad to see the end of the UK; it's the country that I've lived in for my whole life, and that my father served in the RAF for a number of years (and his first posting, shortly after my birth, was at Leuchars), he served Queen and country - not countries. I was brought up thinking we were part of a pretty great partnership.

    But I'd also be glad, as a Tory, to see the back of a considerable number of Scottish Labour MPs. I'm also happy for Scotland to have this opportunity to make a choice, and believe that Scotland would be able to make a successful go of it if that's the way the vote were to go.
    JJ, thxs for your reply. I totally agree , my father fought in the war , in the infantry right across Europe. It is sad it has come to this, but the UK is unequal now, and as London does not want to share the power and wealth it is done for. Hopefully when Scotland is successful it will encourage reform in England and other parts that are mired in poverty will get some of the money that is currently centred on London and South East spent there to help regenerate. Unfortunately it is not a partnership nowadays.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Incidentally, I'll be in Moscow for the next 3 days for my day job. Curious to see if most people are agog about Crimea or largely ignoring it.

    Where are you staying, Nick?

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    @malcolmg you have an uncanny knack of making Scottish nationalism sound like a religion. Anyone who opposes is an idiot/liar/heretic. I don't remember seeing a logical pro-independence argument from you.

    Do you have one?

    Very simple , decisions made in Scotland by Scotland for Scotland. Not as an afterthought to some plonkers in Westminster making decisions for London and South East. Is that simple enough for you.
    On the same basis, decisions about Glasgow or Edinburgh should only be made in Glasgow or Edinburgh.

    Even more painful for Edinburgh and Glasgow would be decisions made about Orkney and Shetland being made in Orkney and Shetland, including tje distribution of their oil revenues.
    LOL, very intelligent riposte, look a squirrel. Last time I looked both Orkney and Shetland were part of Scotland.
    If Orkney and Shetland became independent (of Uk and Scotland) then the oil wealth per head would be greater than that of Norway.
    If my granny had wheels she would have been a wheel barrow. Jog on and make up some other feeble excuse for unionists getting a thrashing.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited March 2014
    antifrank said:

    Since we do not now identify any harm from homosexuality or heresy, your comparison is inane.

    You seem to overlook that we already place substantial restrictions on the production and sale of alcohol. Quite correctly, and we could step out further in that direction. I'm not suggesting banning gambling; merely eradicating one particularly pernicious form of it.

    The comparison is not inane. I would argue that heresy and homosexuality ought to be permitted in principle. You only think that they should be tolerated because we no longer identify harm with them. In short, the comparison serves to illustrate there are conceivable circumstances in which you would ban them. This is authoritarianism writ large. There are no circumstances which in principle would ever prevent "society" intervening to correct the behaviour of consenting individuals.

    There are indeed far too many restrictions on drink (as there are on gambling). They should be repealed. The transformation of the Conservative Party in this regard, which used to oppose licensing in principle to its present reactionary position, is particularly disgraceful.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    AndyJS said:

    "LONDON — THE city has changed. The buses are still dirty, the people are still passive-aggressive, but something about London has changed. You can see signs of it everywhere. The townhouses in the capital’s poshest districts are empty; they have been sold to Russian oligarchs and Qatari princes.

    .....

    The White House has imposed visa restrictions on some Russian officials, and President Obama has issued an executive order enabling further sanctions. But Britain has already undermined any unified action by putting profit first.

    It boils down to this: Britain is ready to betray the United States to protect the City of London’s hold on dirty Russian money. And forget about Ukraine."


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/opinion/londons-laundry-business.html?_r=2

    This article has been posted several times.

    Each time I have asked - but no one has answered - why the UK pursuing it's own foreign policy is a "betrayal" of the United States. Perhaps you can?

    Alternatively we can just agree that Ben Judah is a hack journalist with a book to promote
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,149
    On topic, FOBTs are not gambling or betting, they're a form of entertainment wherein users have a percentage continuously skimmed off in commission from their 'booking' fee.

    gamble
    v. gambled, gambling, gambles
    a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
    b. To play a game of chance for stakes.

    betting
    n. betting
    the action of gambling money on the outcome of a race, game, or other unpredictable event.

    Uncertain, chance, unpredictable, all words unrelated to FOBTs.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Charles said:

    AndyJS said:

    "LONDON — THE city has changed. The buses are still dirty, the people are still passive-aggressive, but something about London has changed. You can see signs of it everywhere. The townhouses in the capital’s poshest districts are empty; they have been sold to Russian oligarchs and Qatari princes.

    .....

    The White House has imposed visa restrictions on some Russian officials, and President Obama has issued an executive order enabling further sanctions. But Britain has already undermined any unified action by putting profit first.

    It boils down to this: Britain is ready to betray the United States to protect the City of London’s hold on dirty Russian money. And forget about Ukraine."


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/opinion/londons-laundry-business.html?_r=2

    This article has been posted several times.

    Each time I have asked - but no one has answered - why the UK pursuing it's own foreign policy is a "betrayal" of the United States. Perhaps you can?
    Because successive prime ministers have gone to such lengths to establish our position as the United States' poodle that the Americans expect us to behave like their poodle? Just a thought.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited March 2014
    Ishmael_X said:

    Charles said:

    AndyJS said:

    "LONDON — THE city has changed. The buses are still dirty, the people are still passive-aggressive, but something about London has changed. You can see signs of it everywhere. The townhouses in the capital’s poshest districts are empty; they have been sold to Russian oligarchs and Qatari princes.

    .....

    The White House has imposed visa restrictions on some Russian officials, and President Obama has issued an executive order enabling further sanctions. But Britain has already undermined any unified action by putting profit first.

    It boils down to this: Britain is ready to betray the United States to protect the City of London’s hold on dirty Russian money. And forget about Ukraine."


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/opinion/londons-laundry-business.html?_r=2

    This article has been posted several times.

    Each time I have asked - but no one has answered - why the UK pursuing it's own foreign policy is a "betrayal" of the United States. Perhaps you can?
    Because successive prime ministers have gone to such lengths to establish our position as the United States' poodle that the Americans expect us to behave like their poodle? Just a thought.

    A misuse of language - it's such a shame that polemicists do that because it denudes the more emotive words of their power

    The mainstream media are just as guilty - everything is a "tragedy" or a "crisis" when they really very rarely are...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    The one thing I thought all US papers majored on is ferocious fact checkers. Very strange the Judah piece got through. Maybe they just wanted it to be true so much that they could not bear to check. Of course, London is better than New York in just about every way - more beautiful, more diverse, more happening, more history, more languages, more open, more to see and do, more exciting, more challenging and so on. You get a better steak in New York though. And the Staten Island Ferry is kinda neat.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited March 2014
    Palin for president:
    I've just bet £50 @ 50/1. Not a great price; others obviously think she has a chance in 2016.

    What a fight! Hillary V Sara. An all girls scrap: no holds barred.

    @JamesDelingpole
    I've got my Rand Paul t shirt, don't worry. But I just think Palin has magic. She's got that Ronald Reagan common touch.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    AveryLP said:

    Incidentally, I'll be in Moscow for the next 3 days for my day job. Curious to see if most people are agog about Crimea or largely ignoring it.

    Where are you staying, Nick?

    Just the Bakrushina Ibis - it's cheap (I'm travelling on donors' money so trying not to waste their £s), with broadband, and close where I need to be (a science lab where we're promoting non-animal testing). There seems to be a regular train from Domodedovo airport to Paveletsky railway station, which is 5 minutes' walk away.

    I've been once before and enjoyed it, partly for the wildly eclctic architecture from the three periods - Imperial, Soviet and post-Soviet, so you can find a magnificent Orthodox church with its onion domes, a heroic worker statue and a McDonalds, all cheek by jowl. It did strike me as an edgy place - apart from the traffic which TSE mentions, I saw an elegant-looking lady throwing up in a litter bin, a militiaman propping up a drunk against a lamppost (looked as if he wasn't sure whether to help him or arrest him), lots of broken-down cars and a general frontier air of making do in chaotic circumstances.

    But equally there were lots of teenagers looking exactly like teenagers everywhere, possibly the only artistically attractive underground system in the world, spectacularly beautiful threates and galleries and throbbing life everywhere. Not exactly an enticing place, but not your routine modern city.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    AndyJS said:

    "LONDON — THE city has changed. The buses are still dirty, the people are still passive-aggressive, but something about London has changed. You can see signs of it everywhere. The townhouses in the capital’s poshest districts are empty; they have been sold to Russian oligarchs and Qatari princes.

    .....

    The White House has imposed visa restrictions on some Russian officials, and President Obama has issued an executive order enabling further sanctions. But Britain has already undermined any unified action by putting profit first.

    It boils down to this: Britain is ready to betray the United States to protect the City of London’s hold on dirty Russian money. And forget about Ukraine."


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/opinion/londons-laundry-business.html?_r=2

    Instead, Britain should support the borders created by Stalin. Stalin created those borders deliberately to make "Ukraine" more Russian. The Crimea was never part of Ukraine. The people are Russian.

    The US though it could upset the location of the Russian Black Sea Navy. Putin ain't that stupid !
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    MikeK said:

    Palin for president:
    I've just bet £50 @ 50/1. Not a great price; others obviously think she has a chance in 2016.

    What a fight! Hillary V Sara. An all girls scrap: no holds barred.

    @JamesDelingpole
    I've got my Rand Paul t shirt, don't worry. But I just think Palin has magic. She's got that Ronald Reagan common touch.

    Reagan was more intelligent !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    The one thing I thought all US papers majored on is ferocious fact checkers. Very strange the Judah piece got through. Maybe they just wanted it to be true so much that they could not bear to check. Of course, London is better than New York in just about every way - more beautiful, more diverse, more happening, more history, more languages, more open, more to see and do, more exciting, more challenging and so on. You get a better steak in New York though. And the Staten Island Ferry is kinda neat.

    I do not like the USA at all. But I do like NYC and Boston.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    antifrank said:

    FOBTs do a lot of harm. Can anyone identify any substantial good that they do?

    They allow people who enjoy fixed odds betting to do fixed odds betting.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Survation poll by Express does not get result they expected, proves unionists are a bunch of thugs

    In a worrying development for the Better Together campaign, 21 per cent of those planning to vote Yes have received abuse or threats compared to just eight per cent of those planning to vote No.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/463823/SCOTLAND-AT-WAR-Death-threats-shame-both-camps-as-fight-for-votes-spirals-out-of-control

    Of course, it couldn't possibly be that pro-Independence supporters are thin skinned and touchy with a well developed sense of victim hood? Perish the thought.....
    LOL, those lovely unionists are now calling us thin skinned. First they claim Cybernats are terrorising poor unionists and when the truth outs , suddenly it is down to us being shrinking violets. Weak weak weak even by your standards. Unionist thugs shown up for what they are.
    Thin skinned victim hood:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/10686556/Salmond-accused-of-playing-politics-after-writing-to-David-Cameron-over-Dounreay-incident.html

    Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) had been informed [of the leak at Dounraey].

    Sepa said it did not believe there was any need to inform the Scottish Government about the discharges as they were "well below the authorised limits set for the site, and there was no environmental impact".
    A spokesman added: "That limit is set at less than one millionth of the public dose limit. Currently no impact on the local environment has been observed as a result of these discharges and monitoring work will continue at the facility until it is fully decommissioned, to ensure any future emissions remain low."

    However, Mr Salmond expressed “deep dismay” over the issue in his letter to the Prime Minister and accused Westminster of ignoring its responsibility for good communication under the Memorandum of Understanding on Devolution (MOU).

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2014

    The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

    With the LDs it's compulsory:

    "Lib Dem council election candidates have had to promise to pay cash towards ‘’party activities’’ if they win a seat, as a condition of being allowed to stand. "

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/170288/Council-tax-cash-goes-to-party-funds

    "For many years now the Lib Dems have automatically levied a 10% tithe on all their elected officials on the income they get from politics - councillors, MPs, MSPs, MEPs, and even government ministers."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2011/05/election_losses_leave_lib_dems.html
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Incidentally, I'll be in Moscow for the next 3 days for my day job. Curious to see if most people are agog about Crimea or largely ignoring it.

    Great place for a few days. But July and August would hav ebeen better. I take it you have been there before ?

  • The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

    With the LDs it's compulsory:

    "Lib Dem council election candidates have had to promise to pay cash towards ‘’party activities’’ if they win a seat, as a condition of being allowed to stand. The amount is not specified in party rules.

    But it follows a review suggesting a “tithe’’ – traditionally a 10 per cent contribution – on all the party’s paid elected representatives."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/170288/Council-tax-cash-goes-to-party-funds
    As the Times notes, that's permissible if you're a councillor, but not if you're an MEP.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    surbiton said:



    Great place for a few days. But July and August would hav ebeen better. I take it you have been there before ?

    Just the once, see earlier post.

    On tithes etc., I believe Campaign Group MPs are asked to donate 10% of their salaries to the group. It's pretty common in all parties for elected representatives to be asked to give something to the party that helped get them there. The dodgy bit in the UKIP quote is the hint that expenses can be claimed without scrutiny. But I don't think most UKIP voters are much bothered about their MEPs ripping off the European system, not taking part in many debates, etc.

  • The Guardian have also picked up on the UKIP MEPs story

    Bown's email prompted an angry response from a number of MEPs, insiders said. A few days later, Batten, who has called for Muslims in Britain to sign a pledge of allegiance, sent an email claiming that following Bown's advice would risk a criminal record and jail.

    "The staff and office allowance combined is £253k," said Batten. "This money can only be spent according to the rules on staff and offices. Only £42k of that does not require 'receipts'. To use it for personal or political purposes is against the rules. Are you suggesting we should use it illegally? Are you suggesting we should risk prison to help the Party financially?"

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/09/ukip-meps-urged-breach-allowance-rules?CMP=twt_fd
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

    With the LDs it's compulsory:

    "Lib Dem council election candidates have had to promise to pay cash towards ‘’party activities’’ if they win a seat, as a condition of being allowed to stand. The amount is not specified in party rules.

    But it follows a review suggesting a “tithe’’ – traditionally a 10 per cent contribution – on all the party’s paid elected representatives."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/170288/Council-tax-cash-goes-to-party-funds
    As the Times notes, that's permissible if you're a councillor, but not if you're an MEP.
    I don't subscribe to The Times website, but I suspect they're referring to EU money given to MEP groups. What MEPs do with their salaries is up to them.
  • The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

    With the LDs it's compulsory:

    "Lib Dem council election candidates have had to promise to pay cash towards ‘’party activities’’ if they win a seat, as a condition of being allowed to stand. The amount is not specified in party rules.

    But it follows a review suggesting a “tithe’’ – traditionally a 10 per cent contribution – on all the party’s paid elected representatives."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/170288/Council-tax-cash-goes-to-party-funds
    As the Times notes, that's permissible if you're a councillor, but not if you're an MEP.
    I don't subscribe to The Times website, but I suspect they're referring to EU money given to MEP groups. What MEPs do with their salaries is up to them.
    Errr no, read the bit I quoted from the Times and subsequently from the Guardian below.

    A leading member of the UK Independence party, which has railed against the European "gravy train", has demanded its MEPs contribute £10,000 each from their parliamentary allowances and salaries towards the costs of the party's British headquarters or risk being deselected.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2014

    The Guardian have also picked up on the UKIP MEPs story

    Bown's email prompted an angry response from a number of MEPs, insiders said. A few days later, Batten, who has called for Muslims in Britain to sign a pledge of allegiance, sent an email claiming that following Bown's advice would risk a criminal record and jail.

    "The staff and office allowance combined is £253k," said Batten. "This money can only be spent according to the rules on staff and offices. Only £42k of that does not require 'receipts'. To use it for personal or political purposes is against the rules. Are you suggesting we should use it illegally? Are you suggesting we should risk prison to help the Party financially?"

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/09/ukip-meps-urged-breach-allowance-rules?CMP=twt_fd

    The key quote from that article being, "Any donations they make to the party come from their post-tax salaries."


  • The Guardian have also picked up on the UKIP MEPs story

    Bown's email prompted an angry response from a number of MEPs, insiders said. A few days later, Batten, who has called for Muslims in Britain to sign a pledge of allegiance, sent an email claiming that following Bown's advice would risk a criminal record and jail.

    "The staff and office allowance combined is £253k," said Batten. "This money can only be spent according to the rules on staff and offices. Only £42k of that does not require 'receipts'. To use it for personal or political purposes is against the rules. Are you suggesting we should use it illegally? Are you suggesting we should risk prison to help the Party financially?"

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/09/ukip-meps-urged-breach-allowance-rules?CMP=twt_fd

    The key quote from that article being, "Any donations they make to the party come from their post-tax salaries."
    Not the

    Two of the party's senior members have repaid more than £37,000 meant for office staff after diverting it to party workers based in the UK.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

    With the LDs it's compulsory:

    "Lib Dem council election candidates have had to promise to pay cash towards ‘’party activities’’ if they win a seat, as a condition of being allowed to stand. The amount is not specified in party rules.

    But it follows a review suggesting a “tithe’’ – traditionally a 10 per cent contribution – on all the party’s paid elected representatives."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/170288/Council-tax-cash-goes-to-party-funds
    As the Times notes, that's permissible if you're a councillor, but not if you're an MEP.
    I don't subscribe to The Times website, but I suspect they're referring to EU money given to MEP groups. What MEPs do with their salaries is up to them.
    Errr no, read the bit I quoted from the Times and subsequently from the Guardian below.

    A leading member of the UK Independence party, which has railed against the European "gravy train", has demanded its MEPs contribute £10,000 each from their parliamentary allowances and salaries towards the costs of the party's British headquarters or risk being deselected.
    "Demanded" is The Guardian's word.

    The MEPs have explained to Mr Brown that they cannot donate expense allowances to party funds.

    I believe LD MPs often use their expense allowance to "rent" office space from their local party. If UKIP want to benefit from their MEP expense accounts they'll probably end up doing something similar.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746



    The Guardian have also picked up on the UKIP MEPs story

    Bown's email prompted an angry response from a number of MEPs, insiders said. A few days later, Batten, who has called for Muslims in Britain to sign a pledge of allegiance, sent an email claiming that following Bown's advice would risk a criminal record and jail.

    "The staff and office allowance combined is £253k," said Batten. "This money can only be spent according to the rules on staff and offices. Only £42k of that does not require 'receipts'. To use it for personal or political purposes is against the rules. Are you suggesting we should use it illegally? Are you suggesting we should risk prison to help the Party financially?"

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/09/ukip-meps-urged-breach-allowance-rules?CMP=twt_fd

    The key quote from that article being, "Any donations they make to the party come from their post-tax salaries."
    Not the

    Two of the party's senior members have repaid more than £37,000 meant for office staff after diverting it to party workers based in the UK.
    The individuals, and the circumstances aren't given, but in his 'Flying Free' book Mr Farage mentions donating money to the legal defense of a maket trader (he was being prosecuted for selling by the lb) and then repaying he money when leaned on by the EU Parliament bods. Perhaps that's what they're referring to?
  • What really should concern UKIP is that there's a whistleblower/leak at the top echelons of their party.

    A lot of the the stuff coming out can only have come from the inside, there's another story in the Times that Farage's wife called the Mayfair HQ a freak show

    The timing is great for anyone wanting to see UKIP damaged prior to the Euros.
  • The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

    With the LDs it's compulsory:

    "Lib Dem council election candidates have had to promise to pay cash towards ‘’party activities’’ if they win a seat, as a condition of being allowed to stand. The amount is not specified in party rules.

    But it follows a review suggesting a “tithe’’ – traditionally a 10 per cent contribution – on all the party’s paid elected representatives."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/170288/Council-tax-cash-goes-to-party-funds
    As the Times notes, that's permissible if you're a councillor, but not if you're an MEP.
    I don't subscribe to The Times website, but I suspect they're referring to EU money given to MEP groups. What MEPs do with their salaries is up to them.
    Errr no, read the bit I quoted from the Times and subsequently from the Guardian below.

    A leading member of the UK Independence party, which has railed against the European "gravy train", has demanded its MEPs contribute £10,000 each from their parliamentary allowances and salaries towards the costs of the party's British headquarters or risk being deselected.
    "Demanded" is The Guardian's word.

    The MEPs have explained to Mr Brown that they cannot donate expense allowances to party funds.

    I believe LD MPs often use their expense allowance to "rent" office space from their local party. If UKIP want to benefit from their MEP expense accounts they'll probably end up doing something similar.
    If you're defence is going to be "We're just like the Lib Dems" then you're going to need a better defence.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2014



    If you're defence is going to be "We're just like the Lib Dems" then you're going to need a better defence.

    I'm not using any defence there. I'm saying the MEPs are not breaking the rules, and suggesting a way that the party may end up bending the rules if they're determined to get some of the expense money.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2014

    What really should concern UKIP is that there's a whistleblower/leak at the top echelons of their party.

    A lot of the the stuff coming out can only have come from the inside, there's another story in the Times that Farage's wife called the Mayfair HQ a freak show

    The timing is great for anyone wanting to see UKIP damaged prior to the Euros.

    I think the weekend story mentioned something about a sacked member of the PR department.

    EDIT
    "A former member of the Ukip press office in London"

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576217/Ukip-faces-investigation-claims-used-public-money-Brussels-fund-party-spin-doctors-Britain.html
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    SeanT said:
    The NYT article could turn out to be prophetic about The Shard, so who knows. I didn't like the suggestion of 'betraying America' as if we owe them our loyalty at all times but the general tone of the article was correct. Britain has become very grubby indeed.
    And if you want an example of how grubby Britain has become, gratis, just take a look at the article above. FOBTs? Internet gambling?

    Why doesn't this country return to making an honest living? Too much like hard work, I suppose.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited March 2014
    @NickPalmer

    Just the Bakrushina Ibis - it's cheap (I'm travelling on donors' money so trying not to waste their £s), with broadband, and close where I need to be (a science lab where we're promoting non-animal testing). There seems to be a regular train from Domodedovo airport to Paveletsky railway station, which is 5 minutes' walk away.

    Your hotel is located in one of my favourite parts of Moscow which still has a large number old two storey pre-revolutionary stuccoed buildings. A relatively quiet area and out of the way of most of the city's gharish excitement. Restoring one of these minor noble palaces in the area as a town residence was an unfulfilled dream of mine.

    You are within walking distance of the Tretyakov Gallery (Tate equivalent) too which is well worth a visit if you have at least half a day spare.

    You are quite right about Moscow's eclectic mix of architecture: it is similar to Glasgow and Liverpool in that respect where St. Petersburg is much more Edinburgh. Moscow has even more muscular power though than its UK's 'twins'.

    I doubt you will get much political opinion on Crimea though. In my experience, even one's longest and closest Russian friends are very reluctant to express their views on internal Russian politics, preferring to tell you either the official line for inquiring foreigners or what they think you want to hear.

    I remember, in 1996, when the news broke that Russian forces had killed the Chechen separatist Dzhokhar Dudayev. He had been using a satellite mobile phone in a field and the Russians tracked it and launched two guided missiles at their target. I was in a meeting with my main Russian counterpart whom I had been working with for a decade and he let out a whoop of clenched fist arm waving triumphal joy, then suddenly realised that what he had done had broken his hard earned reputation of diffident neutrality when exposed to westerners. The best way to deal with such involuntary 'confessions' of nationalism is to smile enigmatically. Taking sides on matters Russians consider domestic is a risky business!

    I am told that Moscow is enjoying record warm weather for March with all snow gone a month early, so don't wrap up too warm. And don't take taxis! Just hold your arm out horizontally and private drivers will stop and give you a lift. You need to agree a fee first. It will be much less than a taxi fare but that isn't the point. The best way to enjoy the craziness of Moscow is to engage with its residents. And a good opportunity to put your 'taxi' Russian to the test.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    When you hand your passport over before boarding a flight I'd always assumed it was being checked against various databases such as Interpol's. I was taken aback to learn today that only 17 countries actually do so, especially after 9/11.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    GeoffM said:

    HYUFD said:
    CPAC? The political speech of the weekend (albeit against no opposition) had to be Sarah Palin's tour de force on Saturday at CPAC. Barnstorming stuff. I might watch it again tonight.
    I hope she runs and wins in 2016.

    I like the "professionals at taking offence" line. :-)

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2014
    AndyJS said:

    When you hand your passport over before boarding a flight I'd always assumed it was being checked against various databases such as Interpol's. I was taken aback to learn today that only 17 countries actually do so, especially after 9/11.

    One of my favourite sunday papers stories was one about a UK immigration officer, who added his wife's name to a no-fly database when she was visiting family overseas.

    "As a result the woman was unable to return for three years"

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1351937/Immigration-officer-fired-putting-wife-list-terrorists-stop-flying-home.html

  • saddosaddo Posts: 534
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10686631/Labour-in-tax-raid-on-pensions-to-help-jobless.html

    At least Labour are consistent in being tax & spend experts. Clearly they still believe the magic money tree exists and that governments can create real value adding jobs. Imbeciles.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    saddo said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10686631/Labour-in-tax-raid-on-pensions-to-help-jobless.html

    At least Labour are consistent in being tax & spend experts. Clearly they still believe the magic money tree exists and that governments can create real value adding jobs. Imbeciles.

    Of course they are simply extending the policy of Osborne in restricting tax relief for higher earners and not even going as far as the Lib Dems propose. But, yeah, magic money tree blah blah blah.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    The words 'what goes around, comes around' springs to mind. There is absolutely no doubt that UKIP benefited electorally at the last Euro elections from the other main domestic parties being caught up in the Westminster expenses scandal. But I am sure that UKIP will now be keen to highlight the EU expenses gravy train..

    The Times are continued their brilliant journalism/hatchet job* on UKIP

    *Delete as appropriate

    Ukip MEPs are encouraged to pay a “tithe” to the party’s headquarters of £10,000 a year and have been told they can afford this because as well as their salary they receive “generous expenses” from the European Parliament “some of which does not require receipts”.

    The revelation will raise further questions about the use of taxpayers’ money by Nigel Farage, who is already facing an investigation by the European Parliament over the alleged misuse of funds to pay for staff at his party’s headquarters in London.

    The Times has seen a copy of the code of conduct that Ukip MEPs are required to sign, promising to give “substantial financial support” to the party’s central coffers out of income.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Difficult to believe that in 2014 a plane can seemingly disappear into thin air as MH370 seems to have done.

    55 hours and counting:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited March 2014
    Yep, lets just look at the last Labour government's scorched earth policies and their scare tactics when they told us that the Tories would take away their magic money tree blah, blah, blah! As if any Government post the 2010 GE was going to be able to sustain the kind of spending that the last Labour government had without any attempts to rein in costs to tackle both the deficit first, then the debt building up on the back of it. Depressingly, up here in Scotland. The Indy Debate has on many fronts been reduced to both the SNP and Scottish Labour fighting over just how much pixie dust is left to sprinkle over that magic money tree should we vote Yes or No. There is some debates you won't hear a word about, and that is how Independence will effect the security or the tax burden on private sector workers in Scotland, pensions and just about anyone with a job. But the bedroom tax is front and centre with the SNP......
    Neil said:

    saddo said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10686631/Labour-in-tax-raid-on-pensions-to-help-jobless.html

    At least Labour are consistent in being tax & spend experts. Clearly they still believe the magic money tree exists and that governments can create real value adding jobs. Imbeciles.

    Of course they are simply extending the policy of Osborne in restricting tax relief for higher earners and not even going as far as the Lib Dems propose. But, yeah, magic money tree blah blah blah.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    This is apparently the YouTube channel of the pilot of the missing airliner:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/catalinapby1
This discussion has been closed.